| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> [...]
> First, if Todd had cropped up in RTL and said "I'm going to make this site,
> it'll be great, it'll be an online LEGO community and we can talk about LEGO
> all day long" people probably would have told him "Hey, we have RTL, what do
> we need that for?". He didn't do it that way (as far as I know, although he
> can correct me if I'm wrong). He made the site, *then* told people about it.
The first way is closer to what happened. In November 1997, an announcement
was made to RTL of this: <http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/> and then
construction began. There was some controversy and some disbelief but mostly
it either got ignored or people said "good luck." I think the fundamental
important thing is simply commitment to a cause -- just keep plowing forward.
--Todd
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > [...]
> > First, if Todd had cropped up in RTL and said "I'm going to make this site,
> > it'll be great, it'll be an online LEGO community and we can talk about LEGO
> > all day long" people probably would have told him "Hey, we have RTL, what do
> > we need that for?". He didn't do it that way (as far as I know, although he
> > can correct me if I'm wrong). He made the site, *then* told people about
> > it.
>
> The first way is closer to what happened. In November 1997, an announcement
> was made to RTL of this: <http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/> and then
> construction began. There was some controversy and some disbelief but mostly
> it either got ignored or people said "good luck." I think the fundamental
> important thing is simply commitment to a cause -- just keep plowing forward.
Ah. Well, my point stands (as does yours)- you weren't greeted with showers
of roses and gold just because you stated your intentions for the site. You
went ahead and built in anyway, and now you're King of the World (well, as soon
as we bump off James Cameron... if he's not going to make T3 *or* Spiderman,
what good is he? True Lies 2... feh).
Actually, the more I think about it, apart from his idea about having current
sets' as well as older sets' instructions, I think having the instructions set
up to be viewed right way up, one step at a time could be really, really
useful. I know that I have sets I don't have complete instructions for, and I
hate the idea of using the paper and ink to print out the instructions for one
or two builds.
eric
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > > [...]
> > > First, if Todd had cropped up in RTL and said "I'm going to make this site,
> > > it'll be great, it'll be an online LEGO community and we can talk about • LEGO
> > > all day long" people probably would have told him "Hey, we have RTL, what • do
> > > we need that for?". He didn't do it that way (as far as I know, although • he
> > > can correct me if I'm wrong). He made the site, *then* told people about
> > > it.
> >
> > The first way is closer to what happened. In November 1997, an announcement
> > was made to RTL of this: <http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/> and then
> > construction began. There was some controversy and some disbelief but mostly
> > it either got ignored or people said "good luck." I think the fundamental
> > important thing is simply commitment to a cause -- just keep plowing forward.
>
> Ah. Well, my point stands (as does yours)- you weren't greeted with showers
> of roses and gold just because you stated your intentions for the site
Well, yes and no. :-) Todd's manifesto was so well written, so thoughtful, so
detailed, and so ahead of its time that when *I* read it, I begged Todd to
come to Cambridge Technology Partners (1) as a consultant for a project we
were involved in that had to do with how to build online communities.
So *I* certainly wanted to shower him with gold, but he blew us off. :-)
I wasn't sure Todd could pull it off, but the reasons behind it were so well
thought out that I knew I *wanted* it to happen.
Further, when Todd presented it, I don't recall a huge flame war ensuing in
which Todd insulted all and sundry readers who initially tried to offer
constructive criticism, as well as everyone who had a current site that was
meeting some needs of the community, culminating with Todd basically deciding
everyone else was an idiot who needed to be taught a lesson and telling us all
that we would get our comeuppance soon.
That may not be completely factual but I am not going to read that whole
cesspool again, that's the way I remember it. What I found particularly
galling was his lambasting of Horst Lehner, about the kindest, gentlest, most
helpful person you'd ever care to meet, after Horst very positively and gently
made some thoughtful suggestions.
RTL is part of usenet, true. But it is *NOT* AUK. Not even close. I remember
when RTL was much nicer. It was once called one of the nicest parts of usenet.
Mad Hatter's big flamewar may have been after some of the bloom was off the
RTL rose but it certainly didn't help.
I have not heard anything yet to lead me to believe that MH/MM is truly
repentant. To be repentant you have to admit you're wrong. To work a
gratuitous example... When I drag my suitcase over the toes of someone who is
dawdling in the airplane aisle because they didn't have their act together, I
say "sorry" as I go by, it's the polite thing to do, but you can bet I am not
repentant about it, because I don't think I'm wrong to shoulder the unprepared
tourists who paid 1/10 of what I did aside in my desire to get the heck off
that airplane and be first to the rental counter.
MM has apologised but I am not convinced it was sincere.
...
Having said all that, I fear I am judging intent. I actually don't want to do
that. I just want to judge outcomes. Trying to decide if someone is sincere is
a no win. But we have outcomes to judge, we don't need to judge intent.
I think MM did enough to warrant permanent ToSsing. Not because of his beliefs
or opinions or the profanity or even what he said on his own site. Just
because of the way that he comported himself here on Lugnet, with numerous
vicious attacks on individuals. Hey, I like a good argument too, but I just
don't think I've ever come even close to that vitriol level in my prose, even
when dealing with the most clueless and rude members.
It's not something I want my kids to read (and my kids read .space) and that's
why we have community standards here, because this isn't usenet and the paying
members are paying for these standards to be upheld.
...
Having said THAT, I'm willing to give MM another chance but it would have to
be probationary. Any sign that he was going back to his usenet ways and that's
it.
1 - remember them? Former high flying company, now the victims of a grevious
fall and trading in the fours...
++Lar
|
|
| |
Well said, Larry.
Build On!
John Matthews
Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
news:G2rA03.5Gt@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > In lugnet.admin.general, Todd Lehman writes:
> > > In lugnet.admin.general, Eric Joslin writes:
> > > > [...]
> > > > First, if Todd had cropped up in RTL and said "I'm going to make this • site,
> > > > it'll be great, it'll be an online LEGO community and we can talk • about
> LEGO
> > > > all day long" people probably would have told him "Hey, we have RTL, • what
> do
> > > > we need that for?". He didn't do it that way (as far as I know, • although
> he
> > > > can correct me if I'm wrong). He made the site, *then* told people • about
> > > > it.
> > >
> > > The first way is closer to what happened. In November 1997, an • announcement
> > > was made to RTL of this: <http://www.lugnet.com/admin/plan/> and then
> > > construction began. There was some controversy and some disbelief but • mostly
> > > it either got ignored or people said "good luck." I think the • fundamental
> > > important thing is simply commitment to a cause -- just keep plowing • forward.
> >
> > Ah. Well, my point stands (as does yours)- you weren't greeted with • showers
> > of roses and gold just because you stated your intentions for the site
>
> Well, yes and no. :-) Todd's manifesto was so well written, so thoughtful, • so
> detailed, and so ahead of its time that when *I* read it, I begged Todd to
> come to Cambridge Technology Partners (1) as a consultant for a project we
> were involved in that had to do with how to build online communities.
>
> So *I* certainly wanted to shower him with gold, but he blew us off. :-)
>
> I wasn't sure Todd could pull it off, but the reasons behind it were so • well
> thought out that I knew I *wanted* it to happen.
>
> Further, when Todd presented it, I don't recall a huge flame war ensuing • in
> which Todd insulted all and sundry readers who initially tried to offer
> constructive criticism, as well as everyone who had a current site that • was
> meeting some needs of the community, culminating with Todd basically • deciding
> everyone else was an idiot who needed to be taught a lesson and telling us • all
> that we would get our comeuppance soon.
>
> That may not be completely factual but I am not going to read that whole
> cesspool again, that's the way I remember it. What I found particularly
> galling was his lambasting of Horst Lehner, about the kindest, gentlest, • most
> helpful person you'd ever care to meet, after Horst very positively and • gently
> made some thoughtful suggestions.
>
> RTL is part of usenet, true. But it is *NOT* AUK. Not even close. I • remember
> when RTL was much nicer. It was once called one of the nicest parts of • usenet.
> Mad Hatter's big flamewar may have been after some of the bloom was off • the
> RTL rose but it certainly didn't help.
>
> I have not heard anything yet to lead me to believe that MH/MM is truly
> repentant. To be repentant you have to admit you're wrong. To work a
> gratuitous example... When I drag my suitcase over the toes of someone who • is
> dawdling in the airplane aisle because they didn't have their act • together, I
> say "sorry" as I go by, it's the polite thing to do, but you can bet I am • not
> repentant about it, because I don't think I'm wrong to shoulder the • unprepared
> tourists who paid 1/10 of what I did aside in my desire to get the heck • off
> that airplane and be first to the rental counter.
>
> MM has apologised but I am not convinced it was sincere.
>
> ...
>
> Having said all that, I fear I am judging intent. I actually don't want to • do
> that. I just want to judge outcomes. Trying to decide if someone is • sincere is
> a no win. But we have outcomes to judge, we don't need to judge intent.
>
> I think MM did enough to warrant permanent ToSsing. Not because of his • beliefs
> or opinions or the profanity or even what he said on his own site. Just
> because of the way that he comported himself here on Lugnet, with numerous
> vicious attacks on individuals. Hey, I like a good argument too, but I • just
> don't think I've ever come even close to that vitriol level in my prose, • even
> when dealing with the most clueless and rude members.
>
> It's not something I want my kids to read (and my kids read .space) and • that's
> why we have community standards here, because this isn't usenet and the • paying
> members are paying for these standards to be upheld.
>
> ...
>
> Having said THAT, I'm willing to give MM another chance but it would have • to
> be probationary. Any sign that he was going back to his usenet ways and • that's
> it.
>
>
> 1 - remember them? Former high flying company, now the victims of a • grevious
> fall and trading in the fours...
>
> ++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> When I drag my suitcase over the toes of someone who is
> dawdling in the airplane aisle because they didn't have their act together, I
> say "sorry" as I go by, it's the polite thing to do, but you can bet I am not
> repentant about it, because I don't think I'm wrong to shoulder the unprepared
> tourists who paid 1/10 of what I did aside in my desire to get the heck off
> that airplane and be first to the rental counter.
Gee, Lar--why do I have the feeling that this isn't an entirely hypothetical
example? 8^)
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.admin.general, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > When I drag my suitcase over the toes of someone who is
> > dawdling in the airplane aisle because they didn't have their act together, I
> > say "sorry" as I go by, it's the polite thing to do, but you can bet I am not
> > repentant about it, because I don't think I'm wrong to shoulder the • unprepared
> > tourists who paid 1/10 of what I did aside in my desire to get the heck off
> > that airplane and be first to the rental counter.
>
> Gee, Lar--why do I have the feeling that this isn't an entirely hypothetical
> example? 8^)
Because it's not? I've already said elsewhere on LUGNET that I do this very
thing. :-)
Don't EVER be in front of me on an airplane blocking the aisle and not ready
to go when the person in front of you moves, because I will say "sorry" and
then cheerfully drag my armored suitcase over your toes.
++Lar
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Larry Pieniazek writes
> Don't EVER be in front of me on an airplane blocking the aisle and not ready
> to go when the person in front of you moves, because I will say "sorry" and
> then cheerfully drag my armored suitcase over your toes.
Heh! I don't have much plane experience (just plane inexperienced, I
guess), but my daily incarceration on the Light Rail Sardine Can seems
analogous, and the perpetrators come in two general varieties:
1) The roadblock who stands immobile at the exit when the doors open,
perhaps out of some fear that they won't be allowed to reenter once the throng
has passed.
2) The manic who absolutely needs to get out first despite any throng
between him and the door.
In either case, I am likewise frustrated by people unable to grasp the
rudiments of egress. If I carried an armored suitcase, I too cheerfully drag
it over the toes of stragglers!
Dave!
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Larry Pieniazek writes
>
> > Don't EVER be in front of me on an airplane blocking the aisle and not ready
> > to go when the person in front of you moves, because I will say "sorry" and
> > then cheerfully drag my armored suitcase over your toes.
>
> Heh! I don't have much plane experience (just plane inexperienced, I
> guess), but my daily incarceration on the Light Rail Sardine Can
Isn't that *twice* daily incarceration?
Later this week I will be back to riding the London Underground Jubilee line
two or more times a day, which was deliberately made smaller than older(?)
tube trains. Ostensibly so that the tubes would be cheaper to bore, but I know
the real reason... so that when it's rush hour you're not just squeezed in,
you also have to bend your head because the roof curvature means that you
can't stand up straight.
Well, actually I just found a way to get to work using only buses and the DLR,
but I wanted to complain about Jubilee anyway.
One good thing, the Jubilee cars are painted white, red, yellow and some sort
of light purple. Very garish, but very LEGO reproducable (if you can get the
curve right)
++Lar
|
|
| |
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> One good thing, the Jubilee cars are painted white, red, yellow and some sort
> of light purple. Very garish, but very LEGO reproducable (if you can get the
> curve right)
Hey! Stay on topic for the group!
--
Frank Filz
-----------------------------
Work: mailto:ffilz@us.ibm.com (business only please)
Home: mailto:ffilz@mindspring.com
|
|
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.fun, Frank Filz writes:
> Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > One good thing, the Jubilee cars are painted white, red, yellow and some • sort
> > of light purple. Very garish, but very LEGO reproducable (if you can get the
> > curve right)
Er, sorry about that.
++Lar
|
|
|
